positively affect motivation [1]. At the root of the model is that behaviorscongruent with one’s identities are preferred and motivating, whereas behaviors incongruent arenot preferred and viewed as unimportant and meaningless. Moreover, what children and youngadults perceive as congruent for them is heavily influenced by what they see and experience. Assuch, role models (teachers, mentors, peers) who reinforce and share in a given identity make itfeel congruent. It can then be more readily adopted as a part of their identity – who they are.This is why having caring, dedicated and multiple mentors, for example, is at the heart of boththe CISTAR and NSBE SEEK parts of the REM program and is so critical for changing thedemographics of fields such as
the workforce. An analysis of student reflections from exit interviews of graduatingstudents from 2018 and 2019 cohorts and journal entry data collected from students from therecent 2023 cohort is presented in this work. The themes emerging from this analysis show thatboth graduating students and current students seek to strengthen the RAMP community beyondthe summer program. Their recommendations point to the need for continuing support in bothpersonal achievement and for advocating the needs of their peers. With over a hundred RAMPparticipants now established across the engineering majors and the workforce, theserecommendations will be integrated in the participatory action research framework that anchorsthe design of RAMP. We will address
addresses theseresearch gaps. We used critical collaborative ethnographic site visits to center TGNCpositionality and community-centered research ethics. The four-day site visits presented hereinvolved two mechanical engineering students at a prestigious private university on the EastCoast of the United States. Activities included formal semi-structured interviews as well as lessformal interactions with each participant, such as attending classes, visiting important campusand community spaces, and hanging out with the participants’ friend/peer groups. The visitingresearcher also explored the college campus and the broader community on his own to moredeeply understand the politics and context of the local environment. As predicted by
to conceptualize, create, and refine their designs.Additionally, the course equips students with essential skills in computer-aided design, simulation,technical writing, oral presentations, and project management, ensuring they are well-prepared forfuture academic and professional pursuits.In this WIP paper, we propose a study to quantitatively assess the success of the cross-disciplinarycourse in motivating students at NJIT to persist in engineering, relative to the discipline-specificcourses. In particular, the study aims to answer the following hypotheses: 1. Students who complete the cross-disciplinary course are more likely to persist in their engineering studies than their peers who enrolled in a discipline-specific course. 2
outputs from recently developed AI tools is a quite newchallenge that research communities are just now forming to address [23]. An investigation ofAI accuracy found that ChatGPT 3.5 proved, “…generally good at writing concepttopics…”[24]. One reasonably classifies a literature survey task as a concept topic, suggestingthe potential for accurate results from AI. However, this work uses Gemini 1.5 Flash, notChatGPT 3.5. Verhulsdonck and coauthors introduce a subjective means of evaluating theaccuracy of AI generated content independent of the particular tool [24]. Their HEAT method,an acronym formed from Human experience, Expertise, Accuracy and Trust, attempts tosubjectively gage AI output credibility. In this work’s contents, the H and E terms
IKC Value rubric was used to code thestudent reflections. The results of the study demonstrated that living in the learning communityand studying the concepts of intercultural competence while interacting with students of diversebackgrounds allowed the students to develop interculturally. Also, engaging students in guidedreflection helped them to reflect on the intercultural skills that they developed through constantinteraction with peers that requires efficient communication among the team members. Similarly,in another study by Swartz et al. [13], students were challenged to collaborate internationally withstudents from three different countries during a 6-week project to increase their interculturalcompetency. The results of the study
), an HSI in the State University of New York (SUNY) system. In year one, Cohort Apiloted the PD modules in Tier 1 which featured reflective exercises and small culturallyresponsive activities to try with their STEM students. In year two, Cohort A piloted the PDmodules in Tier 2 and peer-mentored Cohort B as they piloted optimizations introduced to Tier 1from Cohort A feedback. Three types of optimizations came from faculty feedback. The firstconsidered feedback regarding delivery and/or nature of the content that influenced a subsequentmodule. The second involved making changes to a particular module before it was delivered toanother faculty cohort. The third takes into account what worked and what didn’t to decidewhich content to bring into
University, Tandon School of Engineering Anne-Laure Fayard is Associate Professor of Management in the Department of Technology Manage- ment and Innovation at NYU Tandon School of Engineering, and is affiliated with the Department of Management and Organizations at NYU Stern Business School. Her research interests involve commu- nication, collaboration, culture and space, with a focus on interactions, particularly those between people and technology. Her work has been published in several leading journals such as Administrative Science Quarterly, Information System Research, Organization Science and Organization Studies. She is also the co-author of a book on The Power of Writing in Organizations. She holds a Ph.D. in
examsencouraged them to do more independent work throughout the semester. For research question 3,students reported that oral exams were very stressful prior to taking the first one but did not findsubsequent oral exams stressful.MOTIVATIONIt has been shown that higher perceived teacher support and school belonging is correlated withless school misconduct [1]. The same study also showed that higher peer attachment is alsoassociated with higher rates of school misconduct. The most common reason students cite forchoosing to commit academic misconduct is grade pressure [2]. However, with large andincreasing enrollments in introductory programming courses, standardized assessment will be therequired for the foreseeable future.One strategy that has been
in that they suggest that the literature review should be completed afterdefining the themes. This is in part to remain open to emerging ideas and because Braun andClarke [18] argue that the writing process is part of the analysis. Therefore, comparing ourthemes to the literature while analyzing our findings in the early drafts of this paper forced us tobe more critical and work to better understand and confirm our themes.LimitationsThough this study revealed key insights into senior scholar’s motivation to join the discipline ofEER, due to the secondary nature of the data, there some limitations to our findings. First,though the nature of Johri’s introductory question aligned with our research question, it was notnecessarily asked
specialized interests (Itoet al., 2009), but it has expanded to be used as a way to describe informal learning experiencesthat seek to support these interactions.High-school aged youth can participate in the weekend program as long a single semester to aslong as four years. Each year, new teenagers are recruited to participate when other teensgraduate. Each cohort of 25 interns includes five returning interns who lead a group of five newinterns. At the start of a 10-week long session, youth in teams are presented with a designchallenge: to imagine then create an engaging and educational visitor experience. Interns work inteams to communicate their ideas effectively with one another as they exchange information andconcepts, and engage in peer-to-peer
developing world. Dr. George has worked on projects in the Caribbean and in West Africa. Her projects combine her expertise in thermodynamics and heat transfer with the preservation of food, the cooling of space in hot dry climates, and empowering women’s cooperatives to better manage their natural resources.Ms. Erin Anne Kern, University of St. Thomas Erin is a Mechanical Engineering and French student at the University of St. Thomas in her junior year of study. She works in the Playful Learning Lab in the engineering department of her university and leads projects on using code to interpret music. Erin is interested in technical writing, finding ways to connect art and engineering, and sustainable engineering, and she
is now has a fourth cohort of students at NewMexico State University. For each student, pre- and post-program data were available viaindividual interviews, focus groups, transcripts, students’ writings related to career goals, andinterviews with their advisors. These rich data provide multiple insights about the students’mentoring experiences as well as the expectations of their mentors.Although the program is now working with its fourth cohort of students, the analyses in thispaper are based upon results from just the first two cohorts. Almost all of the members of thesetwo cohorts have transitioned out of the program. The cohorts differed in terms of thedisciplines and ethnic backgrounds of the students. For example, all of the members of
isevident within the courses this faculty member teaches, with multiple technology programs andinstructional software are used during class and for student study purposes. The FLC was not this faculty member’s first experience with collaborative learningtechniques. In fact, this faculty member had participated in multiple active or collaborativelearning professional development experiences and had facilitated another FLC focused on theintegration of active learning in faculty pedagogy prior to joining the FLC for implementation ofcollaborative learning techniques. This faculty member is identified by colleagues as an activelearning expert and can often be found counseling his peers on new techniques or approachestoward more interactive
treated communication “only as information Page 26.1493.2transfer” when what was required was a comprehensive development of social interactionskills. He thought that this could be achieved if students were given the opportunity to teachin their courses because “education, like engineering practice, relies on special kinds ofsocial interactions reflecting the specialized knowledge that defines the context”. He arguedthat students should be trained to teach because they also learn when they have to explain to“others using such methods as cooperative learning and peer instruction”.Trevelyan’s position is supported by a review of research on learning-by
of reference is ignored. ASC is considered to be agood predictor of future achievements. We combine here elements of informal and formallearning with near peer-to-peer mentoring, and creative problem solving, in a multidisciplinaryenvironment, so ‘above-average’ achievers from our diverse community become aware ofalternative, challenging, and/or lucrative STEM careers (Lowell et al., 2009), all the while beingin a “small pond” which should positively impact the ASC. We put ‘above-average’ in quotes,since there is evidence, as noted below, that their Social Economy Status (SES) may haveartificially depressed their normative scores.Cultural diversity is both a reality and an opportunity. The US Census predicts that from nowthrough 2060, the
software results, selection of superior design through NABC approach, AutoCAD drawings for the selected design, and conclusions. The proposal was assessed through evaluation rubrics. Table 3 illustrates the rubrics. 16% scored at least 90% and 42% scored 75% to 90% as well as 60% to 75%.5- Peer evaluation- 5%: team members were asked to evaluate their peers through rubrics on different skills such as working with others, attitude, time management, quality of work, contributions, and problem solving. The students were asked to submit their peer evaluation twice, one in the middle and the other at the end of the project. Appendix 6 shows the rubrics. 90% scored at least 90% and 10% below 60%.6- Presentation- 15%: each company was
and sophomore level engineering and phys-ics courses. Dr. Utschig's research focuses on assessment from the classroom level to the program and institutional level. He has published on teaching diversity, using technology in the classroom, and faculty development related to instructional design, assessment, and peer coaching. Prior to joining the faculty at Lewis-Clark State College, Dr. Utschig completed his PhD in Nuclear Engineering at the University of Wisconsin - Madison. His technical exper-tise involves analysis of thermal systems for fusion reactor designs.Dan Cordon, University of Idaho DANIEL CORDON is a Ph.D. candidate in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Idaho
frequently madeavailable to undergraduates. While completing whatever technical training they require to workin the lab, participants create a plan of research with their mentors taking into account therelatively short, ten-week, time frame of the research experience. In this period the student musthave time to complete the planned research, analyze findings and write up their results. One ofthe stipulations is that the research be relevant to the faculty-mentor’s overall research goals sothat the student is involved in a meaningful way. During the course of their research, theparticipant meets regularly with their mentors which include the faculty member as well as withthe graduate students, post-doctoral researchers and even undergraduate
and appointments with peer researchconsultants. Access points related to consultations with archivists and media librarians wereadded in Spring 2012.Working with campus institutional research staff, we were able to correlate Fall 2011 library usewith higher term GPA and retention for first year students while controlling for other variablesrelated to student success.1 The Student Success line of inquiry is useful for demonstrating thatsuccessful students do find value in the library. However, as students move beyond their firstyear, the factors contributing to student success become increasingly complex and interrelated.Therefore, while we continue to collect first year data and plan to check the correlation strengtheach semester, we are not
encourage undergraduateinstitutions to ensure that students graduating from their engineering programs can applyengineering knowledge, carry out experiments required in engineering work, but also are able tocommunicate in writing and orally, work in multidisciplinary teams, carry out the engineeringdesign process, and understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global or society context.Shulman12 argues that ABET’s Criterion 3 (a-k) are no longer sufficient. Nor have these learningoutcomes been fully achieved, particularly in providing curricula that help graduates address thecontemporary complexity of socio-technical engineering problems. Recently, Duderstadt4 called
Edward Land)Traditionally, we look for students who enjoy working with others in synergistic relationships.Each semester (for the past 14 semesters) we (HOAD Research Group) have actively recruitedbiomedical engineering (BME) student research assistants under a joint venture agreement withthe Whiting School of Engineering (BME Dept) located at JHU’s Homewood Campus. Twosemesters after having established a successful BME track record, we began recruiting muchneeded mechanical engineering (MechE) RAs, and beginning summer semester 2011, electricalengineering (EE) candidates.All research assistants (RAs) learn to perform basic and applied research and the importance ofconducting peer reviews in order to benefit from lessons learned. HOAD Research
each other to reach the original goal. This strategy is suitable for engineeringclassrooms because it breaks complex knowledge into different parts which reduces the learningeffort for each group. Also the nature of engineering knowledge, which is more systematic thenother knowledge, make the Jigsaw method succeed in motivating students in engineeringclasses10,11. Recently, educators12 have tried another method called the Peer to Peer Instructionmethod in engineering education. It is a more specific definition or derivation from Two WayTeaching method. They focused on a sharing strategy using Peer to Peer Instruction and provedthe improvement of motivation and the better way to transform the dry and uninterestingengineering knowledge base into
units, writing programs for initializingthe sensor then controlling the requesting of data from the sensor and passing the data to thenetwork, adding a temperature application to the Chronos watch display, and writing the peer-to-peer protocol. The wireless microcontroller software flow is shown in Figure 2. Page 22.34.6Figure 2. Wireless microcontroller software flow.Industrial design aspectsIn the present project, special effort was made to include team members from differentdisciplines. One of the disciplines was Industrial Design whose practitioners give form andfunction to objects. This creative science utilizes knowledge of the arts
ability to reduce heat transfer. Material choices were: bubble wrap, aluminumfoil, colored construction paper, colored foam sheets, metallic Mylar film, wooden sticks, cottonballs, and small paper cups. For a more detailed description of the curriculum, seeSchnittka (2009 a)3 or Schnittka (2009 b)4.In the after-school studio setting, students worked in small teams of two with a volunteerfacilitator to test materials, design the dwelling, test the dwelling, and create virtualrepresentations of their designs and ideas, write about their design decisions, materials used andfinal design. Volunteer facilitators were university students, and were key to motivating thestudents and keeping them focused on the design goals
teaches graduate-level engineering communication courses. Her research involves engineering commu- nication, technical communication pedagogy, and knowledge transfer. She has published and presented widely including work in the Journal of Engineering Education, the Journal of STEM Education: Innova- tions and Research, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, the Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, Technical Communication and Technical Communication Quarterly. Julie has a PhD in Rhetoric and Professional Communication from New Mexico State University, an MA in English with Technical Writing Emphasis from the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, and a BA in English from Elon University.Dr
assignment where students write problems and use some in future semestersObscure the source of the exercise and/or solution by: taking problems from other textbooks Page 24.681.5 rewording questions making them harder to find with a text search changing the names of people/organizations in problems never distributing solutions with problem statements and not including the semester/year on problem/answer sheetsUse newer pedagogies which promote learning through an avenue other than homework Problem-Based Learning (PBL) Team-Based Learning (TBL) Process-Oriented Guided-Inquiry Learning (POGIL) Peer-Led Team
on the needs of the particular project. Most projects are externally sponsored, eitherby local industry or government agencies. Students also have the opportunity to propose theirown entrepreneurial clinic projects, and have them funded by the college, through the RowanVenture Capital Fund, which was created with the support of National Collegiate Innovators andInventors Alliance (NCIIA) grants and private donors.This paper focuses upon the Sophomore Engineering Clinic.Sophomore Engineering Clinic I and IIThe goals of the Sophomore Engineering Clinic consist of teaching engineering design principlesand technical communication (technical writing in the fall, public speaking in the spring). TheSophomore Engineering Clinics are integrated
pedagogy literature for guidance.Students’ struggles with programming and data analysis are not new. In the 1990s active learningin computer science consisted of mini-lectures, handouts containing work-out examples, andclass time where students worked independently on projects [7]. This popular method of teachingprogramming evolved over time with new strategies being suggested and tested [8,9]. One suchmethod is pair programming where students work in pairs at a single computer and periodicallyswitch seats and roles [8]. Another method is live coding where the professor writes code in frontof the class while interacting with students [10]. In addition to challenges in teachingprogramming, teaching statistics has its own challenges and
expand on prior work where the students discussed whatUDL and learner-centeredness are and why these are essential additions to academia and learning(Wiitablake, Eanochs et al., 2022). As such, the lead author asked those who have participated orare currently participating in the grant as part of the Collaborative Design Team to reflect ontheir experiences with the project. The idea was to leave the task open for interpretation, thoughprompts were supplied to all students to get started with the writing. In addition, meetings wereset up as-needed, with students being able to choose whether or not they needed additionalguidance from the Research Assistant. These approaches allowed the students to take theinitiative in the writing process and